Comparison of intraocular pressures estimated by rebound and applanation tonometry in dogs with lens instability: 66 cases (2012–2018)

Brittany N. Schlesener From the Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital (Schlesener, Cooper), Department of Surgical and Radiological Sciences (Leonard, Hollingsworth, Maggs), and Department of Population Health and Reproduction (Kass), School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616; and Department of Surgical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706 (Miller).

Search for other papers by Brittany N. Schlesener in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
Brian C. Leonard From the Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital (Schlesener, Cooper), Department of Surgical and Radiological Sciences (Leonard, Hollingsworth, Maggs), and Department of Population Health and Reproduction (Kass), School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616; and Department of Surgical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706 (Miller).

Search for other papers by Brian C. Leonard in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD
,
Paul E. Miller From the Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital (Schlesener, Cooper), Department of Surgical and Radiological Sciences (Leonard, Hollingsworth, Maggs), and Department of Population Health and Reproduction (Kass), School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616; and Department of Surgical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706 (Miller).

Search for other papers by Paul E. Miller in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
Philip H. Kass From the Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital (Schlesener, Cooper), Department of Surgical and Radiological Sciences (Leonard, Hollingsworth, Maggs), and Department of Population Health and Reproduction (Kass), School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616; and Department of Surgical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706 (Miller).

Search for other papers by Philip H. Kass in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MPVM, PhD
,
Steven R. Hollingsworth From the Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital (Schlesener, Cooper), Department of Surgical and Radiological Sciences (Leonard, Hollingsworth, Maggs), and Department of Population Health and Reproduction (Kass), School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616; and Department of Surgical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706 (Miller).

Search for other papers by Steven R. Hollingsworth in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
Ann E. Cooper From the Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital (Schlesener, Cooper), Department of Surgical and Radiological Sciences (Leonard, Hollingsworth, Maggs), and Department of Population Health and Reproduction (Kass), School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616; and Department of Surgical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706 (Miller).

Search for other papers by Ann E. Cooper in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 VMD
, and
David J. Maggs From the Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital (Schlesener, Cooper), Department of Surgical and Radiological Sciences (Leonard, Hollingsworth, Maggs), and Department of Population Health and Reproduction (Kass), School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616; and Department of Surgical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706 (Miller).

Search for other papers by David J. Maggs in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 BVSc

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare intraocular pressures (IOPs) estimated by rebound and applanation tonometry for dogs with lens instability.

ANIMALS

66 dogs.

PROCEDURES

Medical records of dogs examined between September 2012 and July 2018 were reviewed for diagnoses of anterior (ALL) or posterior (PLL) lens luxation or lens subluxation.

RESULTS

Estimates of IOP obtained with rebound and applanation tonometry significantly differed from each other for all types of lens instability considered collectively (mean ± SE difference between tonometric readings, 8.1 ± 1.3 mm Hg) and specific types of lens instability considered individually (mean ± SE difference between tonometric readings: ALL, 12.8 ± 2.5 mm Hg; PLL, 5.9 ± 1.7 mm Hg; subluxation, 2.8 ± 0.8 mm Hg). Median (range) differences between rebound and applanation tonometer readings for dogs with ALL was 5 mm Hg (–9 to 76 mm Hg), with PLL was 3 mm Hg (–1 to 19 mm Hg), and with lens subluxation was 3 mm Hg (–9 to 18 mm Hg). In eyes with ALL, rebound tonometer readings exceeded applanation tonometer readings on 44 of 60 (73%) occasions.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Rebound tonometry yielded higher estimates of IOP than did applanation tonometry in eyes with ALL and with all types of lens luxation considered collectively. Estimates of IOP in eyes with lens instability should ideally be obtained with both rebound and applanation tonometers. Veterinarians with only one type of tonometer should interpret results for dogs with lens instability concurrent with physical examination findings.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare intraocular pressures (IOPs) estimated by rebound and applanation tonometry for dogs with lens instability.

ANIMALS

66 dogs.

PROCEDURES

Medical records of dogs examined between September 2012 and July 2018 were reviewed for diagnoses of anterior (ALL) or posterior (PLL) lens luxation or lens subluxation.

RESULTS

Estimates of IOP obtained with rebound and applanation tonometry significantly differed from each other for all types of lens instability considered collectively (mean ± SE difference between tonometric readings, 8.1 ± 1.3 mm Hg) and specific types of lens instability considered individually (mean ± SE difference between tonometric readings: ALL, 12.8 ± 2.5 mm Hg; PLL, 5.9 ± 1.7 mm Hg; subluxation, 2.8 ± 0.8 mm Hg). Median (range) differences between rebound and applanation tonometer readings for dogs with ALL was 5 mm Hg (–9 to 76 mm Hg), with PLL was 3 mm Hg (–1 to 19 mm Hg), and with lens subluxation was 3 mm Hg (–9 to 18 mm Hg). In eyes with ALL, rebound tonometer readings exceeded applanation tonometer readings on 44 of 60 (73%) occasions.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Rebound tonometry yielded higher estimates of IOP than did applanation tonometry in eyes with ALL and with all types of lens luxation considered collectively. Estimates of IOP in eyes with lens instability should ideally be obtained with both rebound and applanation tonometers. Veterinarians with only one type of tonometer should interpret results for dogs with lens instability concurrent with physical examination findings.

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplementary Table S1 (PDF 142 KB)
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 1058 0 0
Full Text Views 1698 860 64
PDF Downloads 966 239 19
Advertisement